COLUMBIA
385
you think that the Administration's decision to begin disciplinary
action before criminal trespass charges were dropped indicates some
disregard for the recommendations of the Joint Committee?
PARSONS:
It did indicate disregard for what I understood to be the
spirit of their original report, but before proceedings were actually
instituted the Committee made a sort of amendment in their state–
ment of May 13, which seems pretty clearly to have laid the way
open for the Administration's action. I think that this is something
which has proved to have bad consequences, because it was 4fter all
the institution of disciplinary action that led to the second Hamilton
sit-in. But I think it has to be said that after the battle of May 9th
about the President's response to the original report, the Administra–
tion seems always to have proceeded within the letter of the Joint
Disciplinary Committee's proposals, and the things that seem to be
"iolations of the spirit of those proposals are things that the Joint
Disciplinary Committee itself has either laid the way open for, or–
as
in
the case of the summary suspensions of students arrested during
the re-occupation of Hamilton-acquiesced in.
INTERVIEWER:
Many faculty members seem to support the so-called
"substantive" demands made by the student demonstrators. Some
have even come out in favor of amnesty. Do you think that at this
point it is sufficient-that is, effective--for faculty members who
take such a position to announce their support of these demands
through petitions, etc., or do you think that some further action may
be required?
PARSONS:
Yes, I think that further action probably is required. Let me
say first that I don't consider myself a supporter of amnesty under
present conditions, and at this point I'd be inclined to say to someone
who does that the University's disciplinary action has now gone too
far and amnesty is no longer a possibility. So far as the other issues
are concerned, however: the IDA issue has awaited the report of the
Henkin committee and I think that seems to be about ready, and it
might favor disaffiliation.
If
it does, then there's a very obvious thing
to do, namely stand on the committee report in the faculty · and pass
a resolution in the faculty, which is a much more powerful thing
than a petition. My guess is that that would be enough to do it–
that the Administration and the Trustees don't stand that strongly
on IDA participation anyway. I could be wrong, and the committee
report might also be unfavorable. In that event I'm not very" sure
what ought to be done; I'd have to think about that.
I think that the gymnasium issue is a very serious one because
people whose judgment I respect think that if the gym is built in its
present form, it could cause some real violence between the University
and the people in Harlem. And if that judgment is correct then the
building of the gym according to plan is something that we have a
very strong interest in preventing. I think we should begin with the
more traditional forms of action, faculty resolutions and so forth.
If
it still seems that the Trustees are resolved to go ahead (the indica–
tions of their attitude are very uncertain), I think perhaps a certain
amount of representation to the city and the state on the question
would be a suitable means of action.
If
that failed, I think some sort
